Coin Collecting News » Original Coins

Coin Collecting: Thoughts on Originality?

Doug Winter — Tue, 05 Oct 2010 19:34:24 +0000

“Originality.” It’s one of the most overused terms in all of numismatics. And it’s one of the most misunderstood as well. Given the choice, I believe that most people would rather own an “original” coin instead of one that has clearly had its appearance changed in recent years. With the help of some good quality images, I’d like to show some of the characteristics that I equate with “originality” and offer some suggestions on how to judge if a coin is original or not.

The first coin that we are going to look at is an 1844-D quarter eagle graded AU55 by NGC. (Disclosure: this coin is currently in my inventory and it is currently for sale. I am not using this coin as an example in the hope that someone will buy it as I am certain someone will and I don’t need to go to this much trouble to sell it. I am using it to illustrate this report because I believe it represents what I believe is complete originality.)

One other quick topic before we review this 1844-D quarter eagle. My definition of an “original” coin is one that appears to have never been cleaned, lightened or in any way altered. I would be quick to point out that the flaw in this definition is that, of course, there is no way to make such a comment without having had access to this particular coin at all times since 1844.

There is always the possibility that, in the 1850’s or the 1860’s (or even the 1960’s), it may have been lightly cleaned. But there are some things to look for on a coin that I think gives a reasonably good assurance that it hasn’t been messed with. The most obvious is hairlines. If a coin has been improperly cleaned at one time, it is going to show hairlines. These may range from subtle to very obvious. If a coin has nice seemingly “original” color but it shows noticeable hairlines, this probably means that it was cleaned years ago and has subsequently retoned. Such a coin may have a natural appearance but, from the standpoint of semantics, it can’t truly be called “original.” You can also look for areas of cloudiness or haze. If a coin has these, the chances are good that something has been applied to the surfaces at one time.

In looking at this coin, there are a few points to note. The first is its depth of coloration. Take a look at the color on the obverse and the reverse and note how the hues in the fields are richer than in the protected areas. On coins with natural color this is generally going to be the case. On a coin that may have been dipped at one time, you are going to see the opposite; the color tends to be lighter at the centers and deeper at the peripheries. Also, note how on this 1844-D quarter eagle there is color present even on the high spots and relief detail. A coin that has been cleaned or dipped typically lacks color on these areas as they are the first places that the original color is lost. Finally, note the depth and intensity of the color. On natural coins, the color is “sharp” in hue and depth. On dipped or cleaned coins, the color tends to be “fuzzier” and less intense.

Secondly, note the patches of dirt or “crust” in the protected areas, especially on the letters in the reverse legend. On coins that have been lightened, this dirt is typically lost.

The third thing to note requires some specific knowledge of a series. This 1844-D quarter eagle has the “right” color for the issue. If you become familiar with the Dahlonega quarter eagle series, you will learn that the original color for the 1844-D tends to be either “bright yellow-gold, light orange-gold or dark coppery-gold.” (this quote is taken directly from my book on Dahlonega coinage, page 98). As you learn more about Dahlonega coins and see more examples in person, you learn what the “right” color is for each specific issue. The color for this 1844-D is as “right” as on any example that I have ever seen.

The second coin that we are going to look at is an 1840-O quarter eagle that is graded AU58 by NGC. This is another piece that is currently in my inventory and the reason that I purchased it was because I thought it had uncommonly attractive and original coloration.

On this coin, note the depth of the color. As they should be, the hues are deeper in the fields than at the borders. The color is very bold in its hue and can be seen with the same degree of intensity on the high spots as in the fields.

On page 52 of my book on New Orleans gold coinage I state that the color of the 1840-O quarter eagle is “a distinctive medium to deep yellow-gold.” The hues on this specific example are, in my opinion, more of a deep green-gold with reddish overtones. Why the discrepancy from the description in my book? This is a hard question to answer but my guess has to do with how this coin was stored. To me, it has the look of a piece that may have been housed in an old manila envelope or even in a leather pouch.

If you do not know this series well, you are probably thinking that this coin exhibits a considerable amount of wear at the centers and that this lightness may, in fact, be signs of an old cleaning. This is incorrect. Many 1840-O quarter eagles are weakly struck at the obverse and reverse center (this specific coin actually has a fairly decent overall strike) and have a slightly “sunken” look as a result. Although it is hard to tell from the image, this coin shows natural coloration even in the vertical shield lines which is another good indicator of its originality.

Coins that are not original often have foreign substances applied to them in an attempt to hide imperfections such as obvious marks or strong hairlines. The foreign substance(s) may not be visible at the time the coin is sent to a grading service but it usually becomes noticeable after time has passed and its chemical composition has changed. Notice on this 1840-O quarter eagle how all the marks on the surfaces are plainly visible and nothing is being “hidden.”

Let’s look at one final coin that I believe is totally original. This is an 1856-S Type Two gold dollar graded AU58 by NGC. This is an issue that is very hard to find with original color and surfaces, especially in higher grades. There is strong motivation to make a properly graded AU58 magically become an MS60 or an MS61 as evidenced by the fact that Trends jumps from $6,500 in AU58 to $12,000 in MS60.

The first thing to note about this 1856-S gold dollar is the depth and evenness of the coloration. There isn’t a coin doctor alive who has figured out (at least yet…) how to make color on a 150+ year old gold coin look 150+ years old. Notice the warmth and the depth of the color that this coin has–that’s something that just can’t be faked. Notice also that there is a good deal of luster peeking out through the depth of the aforementioned coloration. This luster can be seen most easily in the image from around 9:00 to 12:00 on the obverse border, alongside the portrait, at the left reverse and inside the wreath. Notice as well how consistent the coloration is on the obverse and reverse. Often times when someone has recolored a coin, they are lazy and only enhance one side or if they do both sides, one is done better than the other.

If you are not familiar with the strike of 1856-S Type Two dollars, you are probably wondering why the hair around the face appears so flat. This has to do with the design of the Type Two gold dollar and it is the exact reason why this design was discontinued in 1856. The highest spot on the obverse was exactly opposite the highest spot on the reverse and this made it nearly impossible for Type Two gold dollars to be well struck. In fact, this 1856-S is actually very well struck by the standards of the date and the variety and it lacks the pronounced central weakness and heavy clashmarks that are so often seen on examples of this short-lived type.

One last point before I close. I have mentioned time and time again that you can not accurately grade a coin based on an image. But I do think you can get a good idea if a coin is original or not, provided that the quality of the image is as good as the ones on my website or on a few other dealer and auction websites. Please note that this article was NOT intended to try and teach you how to grade. It was intended to give you an idea of what I believe are very original coins and how such coins should look.

Editor: This article by Doug was originally posted on CoinLink in 2008, but the thoughts and insights are as relevant today as they were two years ago.

Luster on US Gold Coins

Doug Winter — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 17:48:46 +0000

By Doug Winter – www.RareGoldCoins.com

Gold coins basically come with three types of luster: satiny, frosty and prooflike. In this blog, I’m going to discuss these three “looks” and the pros/cons of each. I’ll also add an illustration of each look. And away we go…

Frosty Luster

The most common luster seen on United States gold coins, especially those from the 19th century, is frosty in texture. Frosty luster can be extremely attractive. I would describe it to the new collector as having a “hard” look and it is most associated, in my experience, with coins produced at the Philadelphia and San Francisco mints.

Frosty luster is considered a “plus” by most collectors. Unfortunately, this sort of luster is becoming harder to find as more and more gold coins are chemically treated. Coins with original frosty luster have what I call a “wagon wheel” effect where the luster flows clockwise and appears to almost radiate out from the center of the coin.

Some of the series that are famous for having above-average frosty luster include the Fat Head quarter eagles and half eagles from the 1820’s and 1830’s, Classic Head gold, No Motto Philadelphia issues and Three Dollar gold pieces.

Satiny Luster

Another type of luster seen on United States gold coins is satiny in texture. Satiny luster tends to be less attractive than frosty luster but it can be very appealing. I would describe it to the new collector as having a “soft” look and it is often seen on branch mint coins from the 19th century and on San Francisco issues from the 20th century.

For the new collector, satiny luster is more difficult to understand and appreciate than frosty luster. This is due to the fact that it is more subtle in its appearance. As an example, the luster on the coin shown above is excellent in-hand and shows very few breaks in the fields. But most collectors would think this coin has a considerable amount of wear; due to its subtle luster and, obviously, the weakness of strike at the centers.

In my experience, satiny luster is more often seen on New Orleans issues, Civil War era gold and some of the Reconstruction era Philadelphia issues.

Prooflike Luster

The third and final major type of luster is prooflike. When dies are readied for production they are polished and/or rubbed with a cloth in order to make them appear bright and “new.” This polish fades rather quickly and certain issues are almost never seen with mirror-like reflectiveness. As an example, I have seen very few Prooflike coins from Charlotte and Dahlonega and only a handful from New Orleans.

Generally speaking, 19th century gold coins with very low original mintage figures tend to have prooflike surfaces more often than not. As an example, the 1890 quarter eagle pictured above is an issue with a mintage of only 8,720 and it is often found with reflective surfaces. Some of the other types of coins that are sometimes seen with prooflike surfaces include Philadelphia Type Three gold dollars, Philadelphia quarter eagles from the 1870’s and 1880’s, Three Dollar gold pieces and Liberty Head double eagles from the 1890’s.

I personally have mixed emotions about prooflike gold coins. Due to the fact that gold is a soft metal, the surfaces tend to easily pick up marks, nicks and scratches and these tend to be strongly amplified by deep, reflective fields. Unless a Prooflike gold coin is a Gem, it tends to have a “scruffy” appearance and may have compromised eye appeal as a result.

There are two interesting subtypes of prooflike coins that the collector should be aware of. The first are coins that are Deep Mirror Prooflike. These are coins with especially reflective surfaces and a look that can be deceptively similar to that of a Proof. As an example, there are certain gold dollars from the 1880’s that are extremely hard to tell apart from Proofs. Generally speaking, many of the gold coins that are designated as Deep Mirror Prooflike by NGC command strong premiums, especially for issues that are generally seen with frosty or satiny surfaces.

The other subtype is semi-prooflike. A semi-prooflike coin, as one might guess, is a coin that has a blend of mirror-like reflectiveness along with either satiny or frosty luster.

As a gold coin collector becomes more sophisticated and sees more coins, he is likely to see pieces that have a wide variety of luster types. By becoming more familiar with these various types of luster, he will become a better coin buyer and better able to purchase coins that are choice and original.

Doug Winter
www.raregoldcoins.com
For more information on U.S. gold coins please contact me via email at dwn@ont.com

The Basis for Collecting and Appreciating Naturally Toned Coins, Part 1

Greg Reynolds — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 01:42:47 +0000

By Greg Reynolds for CoinLink

In the history of coin collecting in the U.S., most of the greatest all-time collections were characterized by many coins with attractive, natural toning, especially including many coins that had never been cleaned, dipped or otherwise deliberately modified. I have personally and carefully inspected a substantial percentage of the coins in the Eliasberg, Norweb, and Pittman collections. Further, I have seen a significant number of the naturally toned coins that were previously in the Garrett family and James A. Stack collections. Most of the very scarce or moderately rare coins from these collections that brought surprisingly high prices at auction, and generated the most enthusiasm among collectors, are those that have (or then had) natural toning and/or mostly original surfaces. Over a period of more than 125 years, sophisticated collectors in the U.S. have tended to strongly prefer naturally toned coins.

Currently, three of the most sophisticated collectors who are widely recognized are Dr. Steven Duckor, Stewart Blay and Jay Brahin. Considerable information regarding their collecting accomplishments is found in the PCGS registry. While Jay is more of a specialist in early 20th century gold coins, Blay and Dr. Duckor have built phenomenal collections in several areas. Not all of their coins are listed in the PCGS registry. Most sophisticated, advanced collectors have similar sentiments and a preference for natural toning. Many of them, however, wish to remain anonymous and thus will not be mentioned. Duckor, Blay and Brahin are all very much willing to share their knowledge with the coin collecting community.

Mark Hagen is another collector who is willing to share with the collecting community. He has been collecting coins for over forty years. I have seen him at many auctions. Further, he reports that he attended the Norweb, Eliasberg and Pittman auctions and ALL of the FUN and ANA Platinum night sales. Indeed, Mark has “been to over one hundred major auctions over the past twenty-five years” and he has “seen most of the classic rarities and gem type coins that have sold at public auction over that period.”

Hagen observes that “there are a lot of artificially toned coins on the market.” Further, Mark laments that “in addition to those that have been recolored, thousands of rare coins have been dipped; the number of original coins is getting smaller every year.” On this issue, Jay Brahin agrees with Hagen.

“To the eye of a true collector, originality is more important than shiny,” declares Brahin. “Natural toning is a testament to the age and natural process that the coin has gone through. What makes antiques appealing is their antiqueness, a normal aging process of the items. The natural aging of a relic attests to its authenticity. If you saw an 18th century original document that was a bright manila white, you would realize that something is wrong with it. You would expect an old document to show natural signs of aging. If you see an 18th century silver coin that is bright white, it is suspect; or if it has bright purple toning, it means something is wrong.”

Jay began collecting coins when he was six and continued until age sixteen. In 2002, Brahin started collecting coins again and he then became “completely immersed.” Over time, Brahin “found that knowledgeable collectors favored coins that had an antique look, a crusty look, with original skin. The seasoned experts understand the desirability and importance of naturally toned coins. They absolutely prefer coins that formed toning over a long time and have never been cleaned. These are much more compelling than dipped” or deliberately colored coins. Jay adds that he “bought coins because [he] loved them.”

Stewart Blay is also very fond of great coins. Blay’s absolutely incredible collection of copper coins was on display at the PCGS table during the 2008 ANA Convention in Baltimore. His collections of small cents are often regarded as the best of all time, in large part because of the originality of the coins included. Moreover, his small group of early copper and silver type coins is considered to be of tremendous importance primarily because of the originality of these. Stewart typically selects coins that have never been cleaned or dipped.

The Eliasberg-Blay 1807 quarter, which is PCGS graded MS-67, and the Naftzger-Parrino-Blay 1807/6, PCGS certified MS-66-Red large cent are legendary coins. Without any prompting from me, and without knowing that I planned to mention these two coins here, Mark Hagen praised both these coins when I interviewed him. “These two are incredible coins; the 1807/6 cent is mind boggling,” Hagen exclaims. While Blay is best known for his copper coins, he also collects naturally toned silver coins.

Blay explains that “natural toning appears on original coins through means such as [proper] album [storage] or paper envelopes” of the kinds that collectors frequently used over the last century. There were a small variety of albums used by many collectors during certain time periods, such as the “National Albums” that were popular in the middle of the 20th century.

“Original toning is preferable,” Blay asserts, “because the original skin of a coin is left intact. When one dips and [thus] strips the original skin off, the originality of the coin is diminished.” Furthermore, “only through experience,” Stewart emphasizes, “can an individual know the difference between artificial and natural toning.” Hagen concurs. “It is hard to describe what artificial toning looks like, but with years of experience you develop a feel for what coins in a particular series should look like,” Mark finds.

Blay asserts that, “when one adds color or artificially tones a coin” by placing it in a contrived setting like an oven or laboratory, he is “deceiving a buyer or grader into believing a coin is better and may be worth more money. It is usually about greed. A wonder coin is an original [high quality] old coin that has never been enhanced and upon viewing it one is mesmerized.”

In my view, more than experience is required to identify artificial toning. Attaining advanced knowledge of toning characteristics usually requires enthusiasm, a natural aptitude for coins, and some assistance from experts.

Since the 1970s, Dr. Steven Duckor has been acquiring coins that never been cleaned, dipped, or artificially toned. Dr. Duckor’s collecting accomplishments are too vast to even begin to list here. Mark Hagen remarks that “Duckor is the consummate collector.”

Recently, I wrote an article that previewed the auction of Duckor’s Barber Quarters, which, though wonderful, is probably the weakest of his collections. His Barber Halves and Saint Gaudens Double Eagles ($20 coins) are amazing. In March 2007, his 1920-S Eagle ($10 gold coin) was auctioned for $1,725,000. The most another 1920-S Eagle has ever realized is $431,250, much less than one-third as much.

Duckor prefers “original, crusty coins, the more original the better!” Duckor relates that, “once a coin is dipped or ‘doctored,’ it loses its original ’skin’ and I don’t want it in my collection. A coin is irreparably damaged when it’s artificially toned!”

Even among Great Rarities, natural toning and mostly original surfaces are often of paramount importance. Though there exist just five 1885 Trade Dollars, the Eliasberg piece is worth more than twice as much as any of the other four largely because its surfaces are the most natural of any of the five. Likewise, the James A. Stack, Norweb and Eliasberg 1870-S silver dollars are each worth dramatically more than any of the other six known 1870-S dollars largely (though not entirely) because these score much higher in the category of originality.

Dr. Duckor points out that coins that truly grade “Mint State 65 to 67 are that way because they are as minted, not altered.” Duckor is probably saying that there is an original luster and sheen that will remain intact if a coin is never dipped, cleaned, or doctored. The dealer, and noted connoisseur, Joe O’Connor stresses that “even a light dipping will impair the original luster of a coin.” An important part of the Mint’s creation is being taken away.

“For almost all silver coins, dipping them is harmful.” remarks Mark Hagen. “There are some strictly original coins that are very dark and ugly. Dipping may make them look better. But, ugly original coins are seldom seen, and it is impossible to know before the dipping what is underneath the toning. Even if a coin has black toning, dipping might make the coin worse.”

Hagen is more concerned about coins with moderate toning that are definitely harmed by being dipped. “Hundred year old coins should not be all white,” Mark asserts. “I typically do not even look at white, dipped silver coins. I am looking for originally toned silver type coins. A coin must have some originality or else I will not even consider buying it. Naturally toned coins are much more desirable and much more important.”

Hagen adds, “most of the collectors I know have similar preferences. I am impressed by the naturally toned coins in the famous collections of Sunnywood and TradeDollarNut.”

The collector who calls himself TradeDollarNut assembled the “Legend” collections in the PCGS registry. His set of Liberty Seated Dollars is probably the all-time finest business strike set of this type. Put in another way, TradeDollarNut’s set of business strike Liberty Seated Dollars is not just the recipient of the highest score in the PCGS registry, it is probably superior to all such sets that have been assembled by collectors since the U.S. Mint ceased production of Liberty Seated Dollars in 1873. Plus, his former collections of Trade Dollars are certainly among the finest of all time. For a while, he owned both the Eliasberg 1884 and 1885 Trade Dollars.

TradeDollarNut has made it clear that he prefers naturally toned coins with mostly original surfaces, and has been outspoken against artificial toning and doctoring. His attitude towards dipping is generally negative.

Stewart Blay has been seriously collecting coins for more than twenty years, and has attended innumerable major auctions and conventions. He is enthusiastic and talkative, and has “gotten to know” many collectors. Blay finds that “all collectors who have been seriously collecting coins prefer naturally toned coins.”

All of the collectors mentioned above are very knowledgeable about coins, are competent graders, have a sophisticated approach to collecting, and have spent significant funds on coins. Less affluent collectors, however, can obtain naturally toned scarce coins, with mostly original surfaces. Uncirculated and Proof coins of some 19th century types are relatively affordable, including Three Cent Nickels, Liberty Nickels, Indian cents, and relatively less scarce Barbers. More importantly, collector with modest budgets can collect circulated, 19th century U.S. coins, many of which are not expensive. Consider circulated, naturally toned large cents, Three Cent Nickels, Shield Nickels, Twenty Cent pieces, Liberty Seated Quarters, and Capped Bust halves, plus Liberty Head Quarter Eagles and Eagles. For small sums, collectors can acquire naturally toned coins that have cultural and historical significance, and are a pleasure to own.

Here in part 1, it is demonstrated that sophisticated collectors tend to view naturally toned coins as superior to coins that have been deliberately modified and consider natural toning to be an extremely important factor in evaluating coins. In part 2, I discuss the relationship between natural toning and the greatest all-time collections, with some commentary from sophisticated collectors. In part 3, I will put forth logical arguments of my own.

Links to Naturally Toned Coins Series

The Basis for Collecting and Appreciating Naturally Toned Coins, Part 1
The Basis for Collecting and Appreciating Naturally Toned Coins, Part 2
The Basis for Collecting and Appreciating Naturally Toned Coins, Part 3

What Does An Original Early Gold Coin Look Like?

Doug Winter — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:03:26 +0000

By Doug Winter – RareGoldCoins.com

As you no doubt know, I am pretty obsessive when it comes to “original” gold coins. I like coins that have an appearance that suggests that they haven’t been fooled with. I recently bought and sold an early gold coin that, in my opinion, was the epitome of an original piece and I’d like to share a photo and some descriptive information. The coin in question was an 1814/3 half eagle graded MS62 by NGC and later approved by CAC.

There are a few things about the color of this coin that are a give-away for its originality. The first is the glow that this particular hue of coppery-orange shows. It is the result of over a century’s worth of toning and mellowing of the surfaces. This sort of color just can’t be reproduced by artificial means. When chemicals are applied to gold coins in an attempt to recapture a reddish-orange hue, the result is usually a shade that I refer to as “Cheeto Orange.” In other words, the orange is just too intense to look real and there is no gradiation or seperation of the hues.

You may also note that the coloration is different in hue in terms of configuration and intensity on the obverse and reverse. On this early half eagle, there are areas in the obverse fields that are dark and somewhat discolored. I’m not exactly certain what caused this but if I had to guess it would be contact with another source like a coin album or some other sort of sulphur-impregated display. Most recolored coins look similar on the obverse and reverse.

Another thing that I have noticed on original early gold coins is that the color seems to become deeper towards the edges. This isn’t always the case but this color scheme is hard to reproduce and many of the coin doctors who play with early gold are not sophisticated enough to know that this is the sort of color that develops of a long period of storage in an album. If you pay particular attention to the reverse of this coin, you will note that the golden-orange hue at the center changes to a deeper reddish-orange at the border. If you experienced at looking at early gold you will recognize this pattern as being “right.”

Note as well the underlying surfaces on both sides. There is a good deal of luster and the luster still exists in a circular pattern. When a coin has been cleaned, the luster is generally broken and the natural cartwheel that is found on unadulterated coins disipates. When this 1814/3 half eagles is rotated, the luster swirls and it does not “break up” like it would on a coin that has been cleaned and later recolored. A good giveaway for artificial color is when there is a splotch of deep color in a specific area on the surfaces. This is often applied in an attempt to hide a problem in this specific area.

How unusual is it to find an early gold coin with color like this 1814/3 half eagle? Obviously if this were an everyday experience, I would not be writing a blog about it and showing the image of the coin as a textbook illustration for originality. There are an estimated 100-125 known examples of this date and if I had to guess, I’d say there are maybe ten known that fit my standards of “originality.” The number of coins with the degree of eye appeal that this shows is another story and I’d be surprised if more than two or three existed.